Single code set applications executing in a multiple platform system

ABSTRACT

Embodiments of the claimed subject matter are directed to methods and a system that allows an application comprising a single code set under the COBOL Programming Language to execute in multiple platforms on the same multi-platform system (such as a mainframe). In one embodiment, a single code set is pre-compiled to determine specific portions of the code set compatible with the host (or prospective) platform. Once the code set has been pre-compiled to determine compatible portions, those portions may be compiled and executed in the host platform. According to these embodiments, an application may be executed from a single code set that is compatible with multiple platforms, thereby potentially reducing the complexity of developing the application for multiple platforms.

CLAIM OF PRIORITY

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No.14/297,694, filed Jun. 6, 2014, now allowed, which is a continuation ofU.S. application Ser. No. 12/652,667, filed Jan. 5, 2010, now U.S. Pat.No. 8,813,048, issued Aug. 19, 2014, which claims priority toprovisional patent application entitled “Optimizing A Distribution ofApplications Operating In A Multiple Environment System,” Ser. No.61/177,149 filed on May 11, 2009.

BACKGROUND

Mainframes are computing systems used mainly by large businesses andorganizations for executing mission and task-critical applications (suchas bulk data processing) that are often essential to the core of thebusiness or organization. Through a combination of advanced processingabilities and specialized software applications, usage of mainframesystems is often capable of providing a competitive advantage to abusiness or organization. As mainframes are often critical to thesuccess or even continuation of a business's operations, mainframes aredesigned for the purposes of longevity, fault tolerance, and durability.

In addition, mainframes also offer vastly increased computingperformance relative to ordinary person computers. Compared to apersonal computer such as a PC, mainframes will commonly have hundredsto thousands of times as much data storage, and the capability toaccess, manipulate, and the ability to perform operations on such datamuch faster. Mainframes are designed to handle very high volumes ofinput and output (I/O) and emphasize throughput computing. Some popularmainframe designs have included several subsidiary computers (calledchannels or peripheral processors) which manage the I/O devices, leavingthe central processing unit (CPU) free to deal only with high-speedmemory. In addition, typical mainframe applications are often used toperform tasks which are essential to the core of the business operatingthe mainframe.

In addition, nearly all conventional mainframes also have the ability torun (or host) multiple operating systems, and thereby operate not as asingle computer but as a number of virtual machines. This is mostcommonly achieved through the use of multiple logical partitions. Eachlogical partition, commonly referred to as a “LPAR,” is a subset of acomputing system's hardware resources that is virtualized as a separatecomputer. In this role, a single mainframe can replace dozens or evenhundreds of smaller servers. As a general practice, mainframes oftenutilize the proprietary operating system of the mainframe'smanufacturer, and conventional implementations often feature a singlemainframe operating numerous instances of the same operating system.Recent developments have enabled the combination of various, disparateoperating systems operating in distributed logical partitions in thesame mainframe.

Unfortunately, mainframes are typically very expensive to purchase andprocure. Mainframe operating systems and applications can also be veryexpensive to develop and/or license. Due to the relatively small numberof mainframe manufacturers and software developers, mainframe consumerstypically have few options beyond a mainframe manufacturer's proprietaryoperating system. Naturally, reliance on a single, proprietary operatingsystem can be expensive and licensing fees for the proprietary operatingsystem can contribute significantly to the cost of owning and operatinga mainframe, as well as purchasing mainframe computing services.Moreover, these fees are almost certain to continue to increase for amainframe consumer over a mainframe's lifetime due to maintenance andupgrade fees.

An alternative to actual ownership of mainframes is to rent mainframecomputing services from a mainframe service provider. However, a servicepurchasing arrangement with these providers (which can be the mainframemanufacturers themselves) can often be just as expensive over time.Limiting the cost of mainframe ownership and operation has beendifficult to achieve, historically. Purchasing additional third partysoftware is one approach to limiting the cost (e.g., eliminating thecost of developing proprietary software). However, this approach alsoeliminates the competitive advantages of developing proprietaryapplications. This approach also requires additional licensing fees andmay not substantially reduce the cost of operation and/or ownership.

The programming language COBOL (abbreviation of Common Business-OrientedLanguage) is popular in the development of many business,administrative, and accounting applications and software systems formainframe computing systems. Unfortunately, due to a lack of conditionalcompiling functionality native to the language, the COBOL language isnot particularly well suited to multi-operating system execution. As aresult, multiple versions may be separately developed for any singleapplication or software system to be compliant with, and executable on,disparate operating systems. This is true even if, at least initially,only minor deviations are required between each platform-specificversion. The problem is further exacerbated as development continuesindependently since divergence may increase with subsequent updates.After a number of iterations and developmental cycles, the sameapplication may be substantially different for multiple platforms,potentially increasing the complexity of simultaneously developing theapplication for each platform drastically.

SUMMARY

This Summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in asimplified form that is further described below in the DetailedDescription. This Summary is not intended to identify key features oressential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended tobe used to limit the scope of the claimed subject matter.

Embodiments of the claimed subject matter are directed to methods and asystem that allows an application comprising a single code set under theCOBOL Programming Language to execute in multiple platforms on the samemulti-platform system (such as a mainframe). In one embodiment, a singlecode set is pre-compiled to determine specific portions of the code setcompatible with the host (or prospective) platform. According to variousembodiments, the specific portions of the code set compatible with thehost platform may be determined according to programming instructionsaccording to a conventional begin/end format. In alternate embodiments,the portions of the code set may be determined according to structuredcomments. Once the code set has been pre-compiled to determinecompatible portions, those portions may be compiled and executed in thehost platform. According to these embodiments, an application may beexecuted from a single code set that is compatible with multipleplatforms, thereby potentially reducing the complexity of developing theapplication for multiple platforms.

In another embodiment, pre-processing a code set to determine platformcompatible portions is performed once the application executed from thecode set is migrated from one platform to a second, disparate platformin a multi-platform system. According to these embodiments, migration isperformed by evaluating the processes executing in a partition operatingunder a proprietary operating system, determining a collection ofprocesses from the processes to be migrated, prioritizing the collectionof processes in an order of migration and incrementally migrating theprocesses according to the order of migration to another partition inthe mainframe executing an open-source operating system.

In yet another embodiment, a system is provided for pre-processing asingle code set to determine platform-compatible portions to execute ina platform of a multi-platform system. According to further embodiments,the pre-processing may follow the migration of the application from apreviously hosting platform to the current host platform. According tosome embodiments, the system includes a mainframe with at least twological partitions, with at least one platform executing on each of thepartitions. Processes executing on one platform are migrated to theother platform to achieve an optimal distribution based on an evaluationof the cost of migration and the processes are pre-processed todetermine which portions of the processes are compatible with theplatform migrated to.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and form a part ofthis specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention and,together with the description, serve to explain the principles of theinvention:

FIG. 1 depicts an exemplary conventional distribution of applications ina multi-partition mainframe, in accordance with various embodiments ofthe present invention.

FIG. 2 depicts an exemplary distribution of applications in amulti-partition mainframe executing at least two operating systems, inaccordance with various embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 3 depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platformmainframe executing at least two operating systems according to a firstpre-defined stage, in accordance with various embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 4 depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platformmainframe executing at least two operating systems according to a secondpre-defined stage, in accordance with various embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 5 depicts an exemplary distribution of processes in amulti-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems aftera process migration, in accordance with various embodiments of thepresent invention.

FIG. 6 depicts an exemplary flowchart of a process of optimizing thedistribution of applications between platforms in a multi-platformsystem, in accordance with various embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 7 depicts an exemplary flowchart of a process of migratingprocesses between a first platform to a second platform in amulti-platform system, in accordance with various embodiments of thepresent invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Reference will now be made in detail to several embodiments. While thesubject matter will be described in conjunction with the alternativeembodiments, it will be understood that they are not intended to limitthe claimed subject matter to these embodiments. On the contrary, theclaimed subject matter is intended to cover alternative, modifications,and equivalents, which may be included within the spirit and scope ofthe claimed subject matter as defined by the appended claims.

Furthermore, in the following detailed description, numerous specificdetails are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding ofthe claimed subject matter. However, it will be recognized by oneskilled in the art that embodiments may be practiced without thesespecific details or with equivalents thereof. In other instances,well-known processes, procedures, components, and circuits have not beendescribed in detail as not to unnecessarily obscure aspects and featuresof the subject matter.

Portions of the detailed description that follow are presented anddiscussed in terms of a process. Although steps and sequencing thereofare disclosed in figures herein (e.g., FIGS. 6, 7) describing theoperations of this process, such steps and sequencing are exemplary.Embodiments are well suited to performing various other steps orvariations of the steps recited in the flowchart of the figure herein,and in a sequence other than that depicted and described herein.

Some portions of the detailed description are presented in terms ofprocedures, steps, logic blocks, processing, and other symbolicrepresentations of operations on data bits that can be performed oncomputer memory. These descriptions and representations are the meansused by those skilled in the data processing arts to most effectivelyconvey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. Aprocedure, computer-executed step, logic block, process, etc., is here,and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps orinstructions leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiringphysical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though notnecessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magneticsignals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared, andotherwise manipulated in a computer system. It has proven convenient attimes, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to thesesignals as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers,or the like.

It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar termsare to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and aremerely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unlessspecifically stated otherwise as apparent from the followingdiscussions, it is appreciated that throughout, discussions utilizingterms such as “accessing,” “writing,” “including,” “storing,”“transmitting,” “traversing,” “associating,” “identifying” or the like,refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similarelectronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms datarepresented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computersystem's registers and memories into other data similarly represented asphysical quantities within the computer system memories or registers orother such information storage, transmission or display devices.

Application Distribution in a Mainframe

According to embodiments of the present invention, a system foroptimally distributing processes between platforms in a multi-platformsystem is provided. In one embodiment, a system comprising a pluralityof logical partitions, each partition hosting at least one platform andeach platform executing one or more processes is provided. FIG. 1depicts an exemplary conventional distribution of applications in amulti-partition system 100, in accordance with embodiments of thepresent invention.

In one embodiment, system 100 may be implemented as, for example, amainframe computing system. As depicted, system 100 is implemented as amainframe computing system comprising a plurality of logical partitions(e.g., LPAR-A 101 and LPAR-B 103). As presented, each logical partitionhosts at least one platform. In one embodiment, the platform isimplemented as an operating system (e.g., OS1 105). In furtherembodiments, these operating systems may be proprietary operatingsystems licensed by the mainframe's manufacturer. In a typicalconfiguration, each partition is communicatively coupled viainter-partition communication means such as through a bus or throughmemory via a protocol (e.g., Hipersockets 107). As depicted in FIG. 1,system 100 includes hipersockets 107 to facilitate communication betweenthe separate partitions 101, 103.

In some embodiments, the system 100 may have a plurality of applicationsexecuting in one or more of the system's partitions 101, 103. In atypical embodiment, these applications may include, but are not limitedto, transaction servers 111, databases 117 and database managementapplications 113, network communications software 115. Theseapplications typically are executed from a code set comprised of asequence of programmed routines and/or commands arranged in a structureand syntax according to (e.g., compatible with) the precepts of aprogramming language. According to typical embodiments, the applicationscomprise a code set compatible with the Common Business-OrientedLanguage (commonly referred to as “Cobol”). In still furtherembodiments, system 100 may also include specialized processors orengines (e.g., processors 109) for performing particular tasks only.

Execution of an application typically includes compilation and executionof the code set underlying the application. In some embodiments, forpartitions 101, 103 hosting the same platform 105, one or more of theapplications running in one partition (e.g., partition 101) may also beexecuted in the same platform 105 hosted on the second partition (e.g.,partition 103). That is, multiple instances of the same underlying codeset may be compiled and executed in multiple instances of the sameplatform. In alternate embodiments, an application may also be executedin different platforms if the underlying code set is compatible withboth platforms. According to conventional practice, the underlying codeset of the same application may be modified and specific to one or arelatively exclusive number of platforms. This is particularly true forapplications with underlying code sets corresponding to traditionalCOBOL programming, where conditional pre-compiling is not inherentlysupported by the programming language.

According to embodiments of the present invention, however, anapplication having a single underlying code set comprising COBOLprogramming is capable of being executed from a plurality of platforms.This feature is provided through pre-processing of the code set toidentify platform compatible portions of the code set which are thenspecifically compiled and executed, rather than substantially theentirety of the code set, as with typical processing techniques. In someembodiments, the platform compatible portions of the code set areidentified via the usage of structured “comments” or pre-instructions inthe code set which are typically disregarded during the compilationprocess. In alternate embodiments, platform compatible portions of thecode set are identified via programmed instructions structured underpopular “begin/end” formats.

Alternate Platforms on Additional Logical Partitions

In one embodiment, a mainframe or like computing system is configured toexecute dissimilar platforms in multiple logical partitions. FIG. 2depicts an exemplary distribution of applications in a multi-partitionsystem 200 executing at least two operating systems, in accordance withvarious embodiments of the present invention. As presented, system 200includes the logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-A 101 and LPAR-B 103)executing the same platform 105; hipersockets 107; applications (111,113, 115, and 117) and specialized processors 109; described above withreference to system 100 of FIG. 1. In typical configurations, theplatforms executing on the logical partitions LPAR-A 101 and LPAR-B 103may be proprietary operating systems licensed by the mainframe'smanufacturer. However, this may lead to significant and/or excessiveoperating costs.

As shown in FIG. 2, the cost of operating additional platforms may bemitigated through the execution of alternate, lower-cost, andnon-proprietary platforms. These platforms (e.g., OS2 207) may beexecuted on additional logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-C 201, LPAR-D 203)in the system 200. In one embodiment, the platforms may be executeddirectly as operating systems (e.g., instances of OS2 207 in LPAR-D203). In alternate embodiments, the platforms may also be instanced asvirtual machines (e.g., VM 205 of LPAR-C 201). Therefore, by usinglower-cost and/or non-proprietary platforms, a mainframe operator ormainframe service consumer may be able to mitigate much of theoperational costs due to software licensing that has traditionally beenan unavoidable cost of using a mainframe.

Application Migration Across Disparate Platforms

In some embodiments, the cost of operating a mainframe may be furtherreduced by migrating pre-executing processes in a higher-cost and/orproprietary platform to a lower-cost and/or non-proprietary platformwhile balancing costs to efficacy, security, reliability and/orperformance. Accordingly, optimizing the balance of applications betweeneach platform can result in significant savings while maintaining orexceeding current levels of performance. However, not every applicationexecuting in a platform may be amenable towards migration. For example,some applications may be intricately linked to a specific platform so asto make migration unbeneficial. In addition, many applications areexecuted from code sets which are compatible with only one platform or asuite of platforms. Naturally, migrating an application from oneplatform to a disparate platform may require platform specific code setsof the application.

FIG. 3 depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platformsystem executing at least two operating systems according to a firstpre-defined stage 300, in accordance with various embodiments of thepresent invention. In a typical configuration, system 300 includesmultiple logical partitions (e.g., LPAR-A 101, LPAR-C 201); a firstplatform (e.g., OS1 105) executing on a logical partition (e.g., LPAR-A101); a second platform (e.g., OS2 207) executing on the other logicalpartition (e.g., LPAR-C 201); and a plurality of applications (111, 117,115).

As depicted in FIG. 3, an application (e.g., application 111) executingon the first platform may perform, during execution, a plurality ofprocesses and/or transactions. These processes and transactions mayincorporate additional applications executing within and/or without thefirst platform. In one embodiment, an application and/or a specificprocess or transaction of an application may be migrated from beingexecuted in the first platform to being executed in the second platform.Migration of a process or transaction may be performed by, for example,duplicating the execution of the target transaction or process in thesecond platform and temporarily executing the process or transaction inboth platforms concurrently. According to some embodiments, migration ofan application, process, or transaction may be preceded bypre-processing the underlying code set corresponding to the application,process or transaction to determine relevant portions of the code setthat are compatible with the desired host (e.g., migration destination)platform.

Thus, for example, data used by the process or transaction executing inthe first platform may be duplicated and used in the process ortransaction executing in the second platform. In one embodiment, theprocess may be duplicated to have the same source code. In still furtherembodiments, the process may be structured so that the same data runsthrough both instances of the process. Alternatively, the process may bestructured such that specific instructions may be performed inalternating instances, the instructions delegated by a load processor.As discussed above, communication and data may be transferred betweenplatforms via inter-partition communication means (e.g., hipersockets107).

In some embodiments, certain applications are dependent on the specificapplication or portions of a specific application and may not be easilymigrated. In one embodiment, applications with the least amount ofdependencies while recouping the highest amount of savings may beprioritized. To determine the viability of migrating an applicationbetween platforms, a heuristic may be used to determine theapplication's candidacy. In one embodiment, an application's candidacymay be determined by evaluating the application's dependencies andrelative coupling to the underlying operating system. In still furtherembodiments, the application's candidacy may include an estimatedsavings in computing cost. An additional potential dependency of anapplication may include an incompatibility of the underlying code setcorresponding to the application with the platform that is the migrationdestination. In these instances, a separate, platform compatible codeset may be used to replace the previous code set of the application.According to further embodiments however, a single code set may beadapted to be executable in a plurality of disparate platforms viapre-processing the code set to identify platform compatible portions ofthe code set prior to execution. This process is provided in greaterdetail below, with reference to FIGS. 6 and 7.

In one embodiment, computing savings may be determined for a pluralityof processes by generating the CPU consumption of an application orprocess, and parsing the source code for the application or process todetermine the number of operands in the source code. The plurality ofprocesses can subsequently prioritized by comparing the respectivenumbers of operands and CPU consumptions to determine the estimatedsavings.

In one embodiment, the dependencies of the specific applications in aplatform may be determined by creating logic flows corresponding to eachof the specific applications. The logic flows may be utilized toidentify a demarcation of a process to migrate the process on to theother platform without increasing the latency and/or complexity of theoperations.

In further embodiments, the target transaction or process may bemonitored in the second platform to ensure the maintenance of certainstandards or metrics (e.g., reliability, performance). In still furtherembodiments, a primary operation of the process or transaction may betransferred from the first platform to the second platform to increasetesting or to complete migration, as desired. In one embodiment, one ormore processes, transactions, or even applications may be migratedbetween platforms. According to these embodiments, the processes,transactions and applications executing in a first platform may beevaluated for suitability of migration. For example, certainapplications which are intricately linked to the first platform may beunsuitable for migration, and thus may not be selected for migration. Insome embodiments, migration of one or more applications may be performedin pre-defined stages, e.g., to minimize risk to the entire system. Asdepicted in FIG. 3, transaction 1 (e.g., TR01) is migrated between thefirst platform OS1 105 and the second platform OS2 207. In oneembodiment, the first platform (e.g., OS1 105) may be implemented as aproprietary operating system licensed by the mainframe manufacturer. Insome embodiments, the second platform (e.g., OS2 207) may be implementedas a lower-cost and/or non proprietary operating system.

FIG. 4 depicts an exemplary migration of processes in a multi-platformsystem executing at least two operating systems according to a secondpre-defined stage 400, in accordance with various embodiments of thepresent invention. FIG. 4 includes the components of FIG. 3, but depictsthe migration of additional transactions (e.g., TR02, TR03) comprisingan application (e.g., application 111) from the first platform OS1 105to the second platform OS2 207.

FIG. 5 depicts an exemplary distribution of processes in amulti-platform mainframe executing at least two operating systems aftera process migration 500, in accordance with various embodiments of thepresent invention. FIG. 5 includes the components of FIGS. 3 and 4, anddepicts the finalized migration of all of the transactions (e.g., TR02,TR03, . . . TRNN) comprising the application 111 from the first platformOS1 105 to the second platform OS2 207. Once an application orapplications has/have been successfully migrated (e.g., is executing aplatform compatible code set) from the first platform to one or moreother platforms, primary operation of the application may betransferred, and execution of the application in the first platform maybe terminated. Thus, in some embodiments, only the transactions orprocesses intricately linked or specific to the first platform (e.g.,assemblers) will remain executing on the first platform after migrationis completed.

Pre-Processing Code Set

With reference to FIG. 6, an exemplary flowchart 600 of a process ofpre-processing a single code set corresponding to an application todetermine compatible portions of the code set with a host platform isdepicted, in accordance with various embodiments of the presentinvention. In one embodiment, the code set comprises a sequence orseries of pre-programmed instructions conforming to the COBOLprogramming language standard. Steps 601-605 describe exemplary steps ofthe flowchart 600 in accordance with the various embodiments hereindescribed.

At step 601, the host platform is determined. In one embodiment, thehost platform is the platform attempting to execute the code set. Inalternate embodiments, the host platform is the destination platformupon which the application corresponding to the code set is to bemigrated.

At step 603, the code set is pre-processed to identify portions of thecode set which are compatible with the host platform determined at step601. Pre-processing the code set may comprise, for example,pre-compiling the code set to determine the existence of platformindicators matching the host platform. In one embodiment, the platformindicators are implemented as structured “comments” within the code set.Traditionally, comments are specifically designated within a code setare used for documentation purposes, and routine code set compilationtypically disregards the portions of the code set designated ascomments. According to one embodiment, the comments may be structured(and/or written according to a specific syntax) such that portionsdesignated as comments may be identified as platform indicators duringpre-compilation. In one embodiment, the structured comments may beinterspersed between portions of the code set that are compatible withdifferent platforms. The comments may, for example, indicate explicitlythe platform(s) compatible for an immediately following portion.

In alternate embodiments, platform indicators may be implemented asprogrammed instructions. In one embodiment, the programmed instructionsmay comprise a subroutine according to a “begin/end” format, whereinactual compilation is performed pursuant a platform verificationcompleted in the subroutine. The programmed instructions may precede theportions of the code set compatible with specific platforms, whereuponthose portions of the code set are identified (and subsequently compiledand executed) only after a determination that the portion corresponds tothe host platform made during pre-processing of the programmedinstructions.

At step 605, the portions of the code set identified at step 603 asbeing compatible with the host platform (determined at step 601) arecompiled. In typical embodiments, portions of the code set identified atstep 603 as being incompatible with the host platform are not compiled.In further embodiments, only portions of the code set compatible withthe host platform are identified; non-compatible portions are notidentified and are disregarded during step 605.

Thus, by pre-processing a code set comprising portions compatible withmultiple platforms, a single code set may be maintained for anapplication whilst still allowing the application to execute ondisparate platforms, thereby advantageously reducing the complexity ofmanaging multiple, platform specific sets of programmed instructions andincreasing the efficiency of developing the code set further.

Evaluating Applications for Migration

With reference to FIG. 7, an exemplary flowchart 700 of a process ofoptimizing the distribution of applications between platforms in amulti-platform system is depicted, in accordance with variousembodiments of the present invention. Steps 701-713 describe exemplarysteps of the flowchart 700 in accordance with the various embodimentsherein described. In one embodiment, flowchart 700 is provided toidentify which part of an application executing in the system thatshould be migrated to the lower-cost platform without increasing therisk of the organization or increasing network latency.

In one embodiment, the process for migrating applications betweenplatforms in multi-platform systems as depicted in FIG. 7 may beperformed in response to the performance of a process of pre-processinga single code set corresponding to an application to determinecompatible portions of the code set with a host platform, such as theprocess described above with reference to FIG. 6. Alternatively, themigration according to FIG. 7 may be performed prior to thepre-processing according to FIG. 6. For example, pre-processing a codeset of an application may be performed after an application is migratedto a new host platform. Pre-processing is then performed to determinethe portions of the code set which are compatible with the new hostplatform. FIG. 7 displays this sequence, wherein the application ismigrated at step 701. In one embodiment, migration is accomplished byperforming steps 707 to 713.

Once an application is migrated (e.g., step 701 is completed), the codeset is pre-processed at step 703. Pre-processing may be performedaccording to steps 601-605 described above with reference to FIG. 6.Once compatible portions of the code set are pre-processed andidentified, those platform-compatible portions may be executed at step709. Alternatively, steps 601-605 may be performed initially, withmigration being performed pursuant to identification of portions of thecode set compatible with the target or destination platform.

Steps 707-713 consist of steps in an exemplary process for migrating anapplication, process or transaction between platforms in amulti-platform process. At step 707, an evaluation of an application ora process or transaction performed by an application executing in ahigher-cost platform for suitability of migration is initiated.Evaluation of a process or transaction may include, for example,selecting a process executing in a higher-cost platform for evaluation.In one embodiment, an application's candidacy may be determined byevaluating the application's dependencies and relative coupling to theunderlying operating system. In still further embodiments, theapplication's candidacy may include an estimated savings in computingcost.

In further embodiments, an evaluation of a process may include adetermination of whether the process is platform specific.Platform-specificity may include, for example, a high level ofdependency on platform resources, rather than total platformspecificity. If the process is determined to be platform dependent, theprocess or transaction may not be considered a candidate for migrationand another process or transaction is selected for evaluation. However,if the process is determined to not be platform specific, the processproceeds to step 709.

At step 709, a plurality of migration candidates is selected formigration. The migration candidates are collected by aggregating theprocesses which have been evaluated at step 707 as candidates formigration. In some embodiments, these candidates have also beendetermined to not be excessively coupled to the underlying platform oroperating system.

At step 711, each process, transaction or application in the pluralityof migration candidates selected at step 709 for migration may beordered according to a priority for migration. The priority formigration may be determined according to a variety of metrics which mayinclude, but are not limited to, the cost of migration, the availabilityof platform compatible code sets and the reliability of the application,process or transaction, after a migration. According to someembodiments, the cost of migration may be calculated by, for example,considering the computing savings for the collection of processes bygenerating the CPU consumption of the particular transaction,application, or process, and parsing the source code for the applicationor process to determine the number of operands in the source code. Thecost of the plurality of processes can be further calculated bycomparing the respective numbers of operands and CPU consumptions todetermine the estimated savings. According to still further embodiments,the migration may be organized into a series of sequential stages toreduce the risk to the system.

Finally, at step 713 the processes may be migrated in compliance withthe stages defined at step 711.

Accordingly, significant operational costs may be mitigated in mainframeoperation through the use of multiple platforms by optimizing thedistribution of applications and processes between those platforms.These allocations may be further enhanced by executing from single codesets of the applications that are compatible with the multipleplatforms, thereby potentially reducing the complexity of developing theapplication for multiple platforms. Pre-processing of the single codesets extends this ability to programming language lacking inherentconditional compiling capability.

Although the subject matter has been described in language specific tostructural features and/or processological acts, it is to be understoodthat the subject matter defined in the appended claims is notnecessarily limited to the specific features or acts described above.Rather, the specific features and acts described above are disclosed asexample forms of implementing the claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method comprising:obtaining a set of computer instructions associated with a particularprocess executing on a first platform of a multi-platform system;determining whether the particular process is compatible with adifferent, second platform of the multi-platform system and can bemigrated to the second platform, the second platform having a platformtype; determining that the particular process is not compatible with theplatform type of the second platform and that the set of computerinstructions for the particular process includes computer instructionsthat are compatible with the platform type of the second platform;selecting the particular process to be migrated from the first platformto the second platform; identifying one or more portions of the set ofcomputer instructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator thatmatches the platform type of the second platform, and one or moreportions of the computer instructions that are demarcated by a platformindicator that does not match the platform type of the second platformby successfully executing a platform verification subroutine within theset of computing instructions that is associated with the secondplatform; compiling the one or more portions of the computerinstructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator that matchesthe platform type of the second platform, without compiling the one ormore portions of the computer instructions that are demarcated by aplatform indicator that does not match the platform type of the secondplatform; and providing the compiled computer instructions for executionon the second platform.
 2. The method of claim 1, comprising duplicatingthe execution of the process on the second platform while the processcontinues to execute on the first platform.
 3. The method of claim 1,comprising: halting execution of the process on the first platform; andexecuting the process on the second platform after halting the executionof the process on the first platform.
 4. The method of claim 1, whereinthe second platform is a platform that is executing in a logicalpartition on a mainframe.
 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the secondplatform comprises a virtual machine.
 6. The method of claim 1, whereinthe computer instructions are written in a computer language that doesnot inherently support pre-compiling.
 7. The method of claim 6, whereinthe computer instructions are written in Common Business-OrientedLanguage.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the one or moreportions of the computer instructions that are demarcated by a platformindicator comprises identifying the platform indication within a commentwithin the set of computer instructions.
 9. The method of claim 1,wherein the computer instructions are included in a single code set thatis compatible with multiple platforms.
 10. A system comprising: one ormore computers and one or more storage devices storing instructions thatare operable, when executed by the one or more computers, to cause theone or more computers to perform operations comprising: obtaining a setof computer instructions associated with a particular process executingon a first platform of a multi-platform system; determining whether theparticular process is compatible with a different, second platform ofthe multi-platform system and can be migrated to the second platform,the second platform having a platform type; determining that theparticular process is not compatible with the platform type of thesecond platform and that the set of computer instructions for theparticular process includes computer instructions that are compatiblewith the platform type of the second platform; selecting the particularprocess to be migrated from the first platform to the second platform;identifying one or more portions of the set of computer instructionsthat are demarcated by a platform indicator that matches the platformtype of the second platform, and one or more portions of the computerinstructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator that does notmatch the platform type of the second platform by successfully executinga platform verification subroutine within the set of computinginstructions that is associated with the second platform; compiling theone or more portions of the computer instructions that are demarcated bya platform indicator that matches the platform type of the secondplatform, without compiling the one or more portions of the computerinstructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator that does notmatch the platform type of the second platform; and providing thecompiled computer instructions for execution on the second platform. 11.The system of claim 10, the operations comprising duplicating theexecution of the process on the second platform while the processcontinues to execute on the first platform.
 12. The system of claim 10,the operations comprising: halting execution of the process on the firstplatform; and executing the process on the second platform after haltingthe execution of the process on the first platform.
 13. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the second platform is a platform that is executing ina logical partition on a mainframe.
 14. The system of claim 10, whereinthe second platform comprises a virtual machine.
 15. The system of claim10, wherein the computer instructions are written in a computer languagethat does not inherently support pre-compiling.
 16. The system of claim10, wherein identifying the one or more portions of the computerinstructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator comprisesidentifying the platform indication within a comment within the set ofcomputer instructions.
 17. The system of claim 10, wherein the computerinstructions are included in a single code set that is compatible withmultiple platforms.
 18. A non-transitory computer-readable mediumstoring software comprising instructions executable by one or morecomputers which, upon such execution, cause the one or more computers toperform operations comprising: obtaining a set of computer instructionsassociated with a particular process executing on a first platform of amulti-platform system; determining whether the particular process iscompatible with a different, second platform of the multi-platformsystem and can be migrated to the second platform, the second platformhaving a platform type; determining that the particular process is notcompatible with the platform type of the second platform and that theset of computer instructions for the particular process includescomputer instructions that are compatible with the platform type of thesecond platform; selecting the particular process to be migrated fromthe first platform to the second platform; identifying one or moreportions of the set of computer instructions that are demarcated by aplatform indicator that matches the platform type of the secondplatform, and one or more portions of the computer instructions that aredemarcated by a platform indicator that does not match the platform typeof the second platform by successfully executing a platform verificationsubroutine within the set of computing instructions that is associatedwith the second platform; compiling the one or more portions of thecomputer instructions that are demarcated by a platform indicator thatmatches the platform type of the second platform, without compiling theone or more portions of the computer instructions that are demarcated bya platform indicator that does not match the platform type of the secondplatform; and providing the compiled computer instructions for executionon the second platform.
 19. The computer-readable medium of claim 18,wherein: obtaining the set of computer instructions associated with theparticular process executing on the first platform of the multi-platformsystem comprises obtaining the set of computer instructions associatedwith the particular process executing on the first platform in a firstlogical partition on a mainframe; determining whether the particularprocess is compatible with the different, second platform of themulti-platform system comprises determining whether the particularprocess is compatible with the different, second platform in a secondlogical partition on the mainframe.
 20. The computer-readable medium ofclaim 18, wherein determining whether the particular process iscompatible with the different, second platform of the multi-platformsystem and can be migrated to the second platform, the second platformhaving the platform type comprises determining whether the particularprocess is compatible with a different, second platform that comprises avirtual machine.